Clarity about the recent Superhost criteria change

[Airbnb]

We’ve noticed a lot of discussion lately about the updated Superhost criteria, so we wanted to explain why we made this update.

The Superhost program recognizes the best and most iconic hosts on Airbnb. Since it began, in order to be a Superhost you had to meet several criteria. You had to host at least 10 stays per year, you had to have zero cancellations (except for extenuating circumstances), you had to respond to 90% of the messages you received within 24 hours, and 80% of your ratings had to be 5 stars.

The first 3 criteria are staying the same, but beginning in July, instead of needing 80% 5-star reviews, Superhosts will now need an average review score of 4.8.

There are several reasons why we decided to make this change. First and foremost, because it’s simpler and easier to understand. One of the top pieces of feedback we received about the old program criteria was that guests couldn’t intuitively understand what it took to be a  Superhost. By making the change from 80% 5-star reviews to an overall rating of 4.8, guests can more easily understand what it means to be a Superhost. Additionally, switching to an overall rating of 4.8 stars also brings consistency across our new programs like Collections and Plus, which require a 4.8 overall rating as well as several other criteria.

In looking at recent data, we estimate that between 90% to 95% of our Superhosts are going to have no problem qualifying for the Superhost program under the new criteria. Ultimately, it’s our goal to have as many Superhosts as possible and have all hosts provide amazing guest experiences worthy of stellar reviews. Our plan is to continue to closely monitor how these standards impact the Superhost program and evolve them based on what’s working and what isn’t. We truly appreciate the feedback you’ve provided so far and we look forward to working with you to bring further clarity and consistency to the program.

[Hitomi3]

I agree with other comments posted here. I would also like to point out that I'm hugely disappointed the "acceptance rate/accepted reservations" requirement added without considering the reason behind the declines.

We as hosts do not decline "just because". If the decline is made because our calendar was not up to date, that's our fault. However, I receive booking requests from guests with bad previous reviews or those who are not responsive to communication. Recently, I had a request from a guest who has 4 reviews, of which 2  were really bad. Of course, I declined, and my acceptance rate went down. Or when I get requests from someone who just says "Arriving tomorrow, thanks!" I would need more communication on things like their check-in time as well as their brief introduction (both written in house rules). Sometimes they don't respond within 24 hours, which is the only window we are allocated to accept/decline. If I don't accept it, then my status goes down again, yet cancelling it afterward would hurt my status for a year.

What is wrong with hosts declining booking requests they don't feel comfortable with? It is our house where we live. Guests should also hold accountability for having good past reviews or being able to communicate. I am a woman living by myself, and it is extra important that I feel safe about having them.

[Mike340]

My Deareast Airbnb,

"We’ve noticed a lot of discussion lately about the updated Superhost criteria"

no you haven't..you have your heads in the sand

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"guests can more easily understand what it means to be a Superhost."

please explain how you intend to communicate to the guests that fact ...they dont even know how the review system works because you do not give sufficent clarity. You people could not be clear even if your lives depended on it 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"In looking at recent data, we estimate that between 90% to 95% of our Superhosts are going to have no problem qualifying for the Superhost program under the new criteria"

so..between 5-10% ARE going to have a problem, based purely on you changing the criteria ....so what are you going to do for them ??

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"and have all hosts provide amazing guest experiences worthy of stellar reviews"

you seem to be forgetting that hosts are supposed to be running a business, not being servants to ever demanding ( and in increasing numbers badly behaved) guests who, more and more often, expect 5* provision/service for 2-3* prices.

What are you doing to assist hosts receive equally worthy guests ??? 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Our plan is to continue to closely monitor how these standards impact the Superhost program and evolve them based on what’s working and what isn’t."

oh , now we see ..so Superhosts are just little guinea pigs in some laboratory being tested with computer bots and algorithms and daft scoring systems in order that the mad scientists at Airbnb can find their perfect mix...ok..gotcha..forgive me if I give all that a miss

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We truly appreciate the feedback you’ve provided so far"

You do not .. ..let's not pretend otherwise ..if you did..you would have reacted to the Community a lot sooner than yesterday and you would answer more of the concerns raised...you choose not to.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"we look forward to working with you"

I wish we could say the same....but it does not look good ....this post so far has 312 views and you have only 4 upticks and not a single comment thanking you for your  "clarity" ....does not look like much approval there ...now does it ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Ange2]

"... guests couldn’t intuitively understand what it took to be a  Superhost."

I am sorry but even hosts do not intuitively understand what Superhost is, we have to look it up and see what the requirements are, so it's highly unlikely guests would have any idea. And failure to understand is more likely based on Airbnb using a Hotel Rating System where 5 stars means luxurious, but on Airbnb it just means a Pass on what is offered and anything less is a fail.  Something only Uber users know.

"By making the change from 80% 5-star reviews to an overall rating of 4.8, guests can more easily understand what it means to be a Superhost."

How?  That makes no sense whatsoever. If the guests didn't understand it the first time how does changing host requirements, which guests have no access to, change their understanding.

All they saw is a "Superhost badge" and all they will see is a "Superhost badge".

[Ute42]

Dear airbnb,

there are 2 statements in Your message that I cannot believe.

The first statement is:

„One of the top pieces of feedback we received about the old program criteria was that guests couldn’t intuitively understand what it took to be a Superhost“

I am relatively new to airbnb and have only started to read posts in the community center in february. But ever since I read the english and german CC every day and I have red more than a thousand posts on all kind of subjects. I have never red a post from a guest saying: „uh, i wonder how this superhost thing works and how the hosts are getting their badge.“ Not a single post like this. Has anyone else ever red such thing? The only group of people who cares how to become a superhost are the hosts, the guests simply don't care. And therefore I cannot believe that this is a „top piece of feedback“.

The second statement ist:

„In looking at recent data, we estimate that between 90% to 95% of our Superhosts are going to have no problem qualifying for the Superhost program under the new criteria“

What is the overall average rating of the 4 Million+ listings that airbnb has? We don't know that but we do know it for the London market. If You are looking for a place to stay in London You will find a line on the airbnb page that says: „Over 1,500,000 guest reviews in London, with an average of 4.5 out of 5 stars.“ Let's assume this is the average worldwide. I think we can forget about listings that have an average 3.x rating or below, because these places will be delisted by airbnb. I believe the overall situation looks like this:

 

While there are almost no listings with an average rating of below 4.0, 95% of the listings have an average rating from 4.0 to 5.0 If You now move the requirements for being a superhost from a 4.2 average to a 4.8 average, You can see in this chart how many listings will be affected by this change, we are talking hundreds of thousands. It is impossible that 90% to 95% of the existing superhosts will remain superhosts, my guess is that two thirds of the existing superhosts will lose their badge.

Does anyone of You reading this believe these two statements?

Airbnb, come on!

[David126]

I have read thousands of posts about the review system and do not recollect one where the feedback was this was an issue that needed this as a solution.

So if I was paying attention I would have come to a completely different conclusion as to the problem and the solution needed.

So that leaves us working out why they did it as opposed to why they said they did it.

We all know there are weird people out there, and perfectly sensible people who do not realise that AirBnB is a 5 Star system. Why should they, AirBnB does not advertise the fact.

Anyway the odd weird one could be ignored, now Host and CS will have to spend a lot of time getting it deleted. You can not ignore anything less than 5.

The only thing I can suggest Hosts do is make sure every Guest knows anything less than 5 is an insult.

[Ange2]

@Ute42   I think you are onto something   –  'tis the season for culling Superhosts.

I find this line is very telling.

"Additionally, switching to an overall rating of 4.8 stars also brings consistency across our new programs like Collections and Plus, ..."

Sure!  Airbnb cannot market Collections (no idea what that is) and Plus as something special if so many 'generic' hosts have the same star rating.  What is the difference? Where is the selling point?  What is the pull?  Why pay more for Collections and Plus when you can get the same for less from a generic product with a badge otherwise known as a host who is non-Plus and non-Collection material.

[Ria16]

Thanks for the update but can you tell me what happens when like last week my guests gave me a 2 for value not because they they thought I deserved a 2 but because they were driving and not rreally looking at the phone.  So in a manner of seconds we are destroyed. There needs to be something in place for the guests that maybe says. Are you sure you want to give a 2 for this host. 

[Rebecca181]

@Ute42 Thank you for your two posts, above. I also want to point out that, unless I am misunderstanding something, ALL hosts must maintain a rating of 4.7 to remain on the platform (Super Hosts must maintain 4.8 to remain Super Hosts). So, looking at your graph using these London statistics and applying them to Airbnb at large, it would appear that over 2/3rds of hosts would be targeted by Airbnb's computer algorithm for falling beneath acceptable standards and perhaps suspended or delisted. Again, perhaps I am misinformed and 4.7 is not the new standard all hosts must meet to remain listed; perhaps @Airbnb can chime in on this and correct me if I am wrong.

By the way, Ute, I had to do a general comment to you down here -  I received an error if I attempted to reply to your comment with graph directly.

[Martina326]

Just joined Air bnb 3 weeks ago, and I am really happy that so far I have 16 bookings, even though I have no reviews, I do think in the area I live in, guests are very price conscious , if I don’t get Superhost status, which now I think will be impossible, what’s the level below? If I m not a superhost what will I be called?

[Ange2]

@Ria16 

Or, to be brutally honest :   "are you sure you want to penalize this host and have them delisted?"

or a softer approach:  "Really! – that bad!"

I can think of a few visuals that would get the point across for all the non-readers.

[Kelly149]

I think most of us would have no problem with the higher requirement IF

- reviews were removed when: a guest breaks rules, complains about things that are clearly stated within the listing, tells a host all along that all is lovely and then writes a poor review, or raves about a space and then marks less than 5*.

These 4 things happen regularly and must be addressed for the rating system to have any value. Either have a system that operates under an umbrella of reality or make the benchmarks accommodate the fact that guests are less than ideal reporters.

[Rebecca181]

@Ange2 How odd, I am unable to reply directly to commenters on this thread, but can do so here. Here's my reply to your comment, Page 2: Ange, I can't believe that with my marketing background I did not think of this before! Some Super Host listings in 'Plus' cities are likely out-performing 'Plus' listings. Given the investment Airbnb made in 'Plus', this has to be vexing indeed to Airbnb Corporate. But to design a new system that will likely immediately demote 2/3rds or more of their Super Hosts (regardless of what we are being told, as evidenced by Ute's graph on Page 1) seems like a pretty extreme thing to do, and possibly not well thought out. At all. 

[Marion86]

I feel that some guessts are just naturally critical . This  should be taken into account with the hosts grading and possibly where guests routinely give low feedback it should be handicapped against the positive feedback the host has already received  let's face it there must be an algorithm for that . Everything is relative and sometimes there can be personality clashes and vindictive feedback .  Also I struggle to combat negative feedback on location   I am completely honest about our location, which by the way i just love , if people come to the seaside they should expect to be wakened by gulls cooed to sleep by the eider and the pigeons . We  offer free use of our  canoes and bikes to explore our fantastic location and they mark us down on location  because they are  usually city dwellers looking for nightlife in a rural location 

[Ange2]

@Rebecca181   

Like the strict policy post, looks like this post has been programmed not to accept replies to individual posts,  separating individual's post from comments on it or replies to it effectively restricts expansion of thought, shared conversation and flow. Every post becomes a disjointed comment in a void.

This new rollout does seem extreme and foolhardy, but only from our point of view. We do not know the path Airbnb have chosen. There is a glut of hosts, airbnb have added Experiences and talked about what sounds like a travel behemoth, the g.o.o.g.l.e or a.m.a.z.o.n of hospitality. Could be the 'hosting' aspect of the business is being streamlined as a niche offering in the grand scheme. In my opinion 'shared' spaces will be edged out first.

[Michael1786]

The whole SuperHost thing is kind of bogus.  I am a host and I am a guest in many cities.  I have found no difference between SuperHost and non-SuperHost.  To me, a SuperHost should have much better amenities, like having salt and pepper and a stove and cable TV.  I rarely interact with hosts or guests - most don't want to in the Zuckerberg era of non-intimate relations.

The difference between a 4.8 and 4.7 is meaningless.  I find that I get better ratings and comments in the summer than later in the fall.  There are a lot of impacts especially since the score range is pretty tight.  Older people tend to be pickier.

I mean - perhaps a level of below 4.5 is a problem.  But I haven't done a statistical analysis of the ratings, although in stats term the distribution likely has a very high Kurtosis, not your standard bell curve.

I was a SuperHost now I am not.  I don't really care.

I am a super flexible host that allows pets and provides a nice, fully furnished and equipped apartment.

The business comes.  Nobody cares about the superhost thing.